Agreed on your logic, MartinVT. This discussion with Sandwich would not be undertaken hurriedly, or the results go unrecorded.
But the "Sam now also has 100L in his purse" is more likely to be his take from the Privy Seal Office than from the Navy Board. (Parliament has approved money for the army and navy back pay, but someone has now to go out and borrow the cash from the City merchants, and then run it through the Exchequer to be parcelled out appropriately.)
I think Pepys had left his 100/. with Daniel Rawlinson, owner of the Mitre in Fenchurch Street, for safekeeping recently, rather than have roughly 1,000/. in today's money, on his person as he gallavanted around London at night with Will Hewer and a link boy. Tonight, probably for safety, he takes a coach home.
And tonight he is home early enough to hold prayers for his household. He doesn't mention doing this very often, so I wonder if it was too mundane to record, or if he was an irresponsible employer: he has 3 teenager servants in his care; he should set a good example.
"Clerical hierarchy were forced to confront a miracle worker of the Protestant faith. ... Although a minor event in an era of turmoil, Greatrakes forced society to confront the relationship between religion, science, and politics. The fractures between these beliefs, and conclusions drawn from them, influenced thinking towards the most famous miracle healer of the age, Charles II."
"Charles began his healing career almost from the time of his father’s execution, touching 11 people in Jersey in Dec,, 1649, aged 19, without throne or kingdom. "From this humble beginning, Charles II became the most prolific healer of the age, possibly of all England rulers before or since. By his death in 1685, Charles had touched over 100,000 people; 2 percent of the English population."
"Charles was always careful to cultivate his image as a healing monarch, and encouraged public viewings of the rite. He invited dignitaries to the ceremony, such as ... Cosimo III of Tuscany, and the Ambassador of Morocco, who remarked after the ceremony that he now found Charles 'to be the greatest monarch in Europe.'"
"... a member of the royal household, Nathaniel Crewe, Lord Bishop of Durham, and as Clerk of the Closet to Charles II, acted as the king’s personal chaplain and head of the private gallery at the Chapel Royal. He was responsible for the healing ceremony, where he presided at the king’s right hand, holding the gold angels the king would present to the sick." Pepys knew Crewe: https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
"... the kings defenders sought to have things both ways: they denied current Catholic miracles, while promoting their own wonder-working king." Chancellor "Edward Hyde ... proclaimed in his book *Animadversions* that Charles II had healed more than any other figure in history -- while attacking the 'Fanaticism fanatically imputed to the Catholick Church.' "Simultaneously denying contemporary miracles and defending the cures of the king was an intellectual challenge; by saying the royal touch was not quite a miracle, they walked a fine line between their theology and their royalism."
"An undercurrent of belief, ... was that the gift of healing was given to those who were personally holy. Charles II was notorious for his decadence, and many decried his personal life. His moral laxity must have made it difficult for the deeply religious to accept his healing gift."
"Charles II strived to strengthen his rule ... consequently sought to portray himself as a divinely sanctioned ruler who both answered only to God, and followed common law and was dedicated to protecting the rights of the English people and the existing establishment. "The royal rite of healing was the perfect expression of those 2 images of the monarchy. The gift of healing was God given, making the king a quasi-divine person. But Charles used the gift to heal and protect his subjects ... not to rule arbitrarily."
Kings, Bastards, and Enthusiasts Touching for the Evil in Restoration England -- By Christopher Andrews An honors thesis submitted to the History Department of Rutgers University Written under the supervision of Prof, Alastair Bellany, April 2012 https://history.rutgers.edu/docma…
His research says in part -- and I have omitted a lot: "Charles II alone touched nearly 7,000 of his subjects in 1660, and by the end of his 24 year reign, he had stroked around 100,000 people. However, despite this popularity, within 30 years of Charles’ death the royal rite of healing was abandoned by the English monarchy."
"Immediately upon his return in 1660, he enthusiastically, even frantically, resumed the full rite, and he touched almost every month for the remainder of his reign."
"Valentine Greatrakes, the ‘Irish Stroker’, was a veritable 17th century celebrity, a faith healer whose apparently miraculous cures rivaled those of the king. By all accounts, Greatrakes healed thousands of sick petitioners, and was wondrously successful in his cures. "'The great discourse now at the CoffeeHouses, and every where' in 1666 was Valentine Greatrakes, and all manner of men and women traveled across the British Isles for a chance to receive his touch. "Even Charles II, clearly fascinated by this rival stroker, could not resist the spectacle and had Greatrakes summoned to Whitehall to perform his cures before the entire royal court."
"... reports that Greatrakes was in England had reached the royal court, and he was shortly summoned by Lord Arlington to report to Whitehall and present himself before Charles II. No account survives that describes the meeting between the two greatest healers of the day. Whatever transpired, Charles was content to leave Greatrakes unmolested, a notable contrast with his father who imprisoned numerous pretenders to his touch. "While in London, Greatrakes cultivated friendships with prominent people, such as the Virtuosi Robert Boyle, Ralph Cudworth, Benjamin Whichcott, the magistrate Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey, and the poet Andrew Marvell, all of who bore witness to his extraordinary healing abilities. ... By the summer of 1666, Greatrakes had tired of the excitement of London, and returned to his estates in Affane [IRELAND]. "By all accounts he continued to heal throughout his life, and kept in contact with members of the elite he had met in England, exchanging correspondences with Edmund Berry Godfrey, and sending details of the continuing cures he wrought in a letter to Robert Boyle in 1668."
It is important for us to know about Greatrakes because it was possible for his "miracles" to be examined, while any questioning of The King's powers to heal were off limits, since Anglicans still believed he was a representative of God on earth.
I was reading about Valentine Greatrakes who, around 1660, had a revelation that he could heal scrofula, and earned a visit to Whitehall to meet with Charles II to discuss/demonstrate his abilities.
It turns out that, after the Diary, he got caught up with the Muggletonians: "Valentine Greatrakes returned to London a number of times, in 1675 serving as an intermediary between the Irish Muggletonians and their English founder, Lodowick Muggleton. Greatrakes connection with the Muggletonians is noteworthy, but it is tempting to read too much into the association. The Muggletonians were a radical and small religious group that arose in the mid 1600’s when 2 London tailors experienced a divine revelation that they were the prophets foretold of in the Book of Revelation. The Muggletonians were a millenarian sect, one of many that arose in the tumult of the 17th century. However, they were a largely apolitical group, and Greatrakes interest in them probably speaks more to his own mystical and prophetic religious experiences than his political motivations. While his continued interest in the religious and political life of the country is evident, most of his days were taken up by the mundane routine of running a small estate in Ireland, and his notoriety ever reached the heights it had in 1666, when his fame as the Irish Stroker had made him known throughout the British Isles. His exploits were remembered, and he continued to feature as an object of puzzlement and cause of debate in discourses on religion, miracles, and science, even into the 18th century."
So after a visit to Charles II, Greatrakes eventually retired to Ireland and did his best to be a country gentleman. Being a retired miraculous healer is difficult -- people always want you to come out of retirement.
The historical context, and Milton's 25-year journey writing this epic -- inspired by King Arthur's myth -- can be learned through https://www.college.columbia.edu/…
Windsor Castle was a prison during the Interregnum, especially for Royalists captured after Charles II's defeat at the second Battle of Worcester. Presumably the townspeople had to host their guards and their families.
In May we noted how the Commonwealth prisoners held at Windsor Castle were set free, and some -- like Lauderdale -- headed to The Hague to renew their friendships with Charles II. All authority must have left Windsor along with the prison.
On August 7 we read of a petition from the Mayor and Aldermen of Windsor to the Commons asking to be allowed to evict the poor women and children who had moved into the Castle.
Now there is a new outrage coming from Windsor: Henry Jermyn (1605 - 1684) -- the fourth but second surviving son of Sir Thomas Jermyn (1572–1645) of Rushbrooke, Suffolk, Vice-Chamberlain to King Charles, and his wife Catherine, daughter of Sir William Killigrew of Hanworth, Middlesex (a sister of Sir Robert Killigrew).
When Charles II went to Breda in April, 1660, Henry, Lord Jermyn remained in Paris with Queen Henrietta Maria. She later persuaded Charles II to create him Earl of St. Albans in 1660.
But gossip (which the historian Hallam accepted as authentic, but is not supported by real evidence) asserted that Jermyn was secretly married to the widow of King Charles. It was further rumored ** at the time ** that he may have been the true father of at least one of her children -- possibly even Charles II.
For example, in the Domestic State Papers for 13 August, 1660, is a report by Capt. Francis Robinson about Nathaniel Angelo (a Windsor clergyman), asserting that 'all the royal children were Jermyn's bastards'.
No wonder Charles II is issuing Declarations and Proclamations dictating that people must behave better. That this report made it into the DSPs means everyone at Court heard this slight on Queen Henrietta Maria's reputation, and of his family. Very galling.
REFERENCE: Adolph, Anthony (2012). The King's Henchman. Henry Jermyn: Stuart Spymaster and Architect of the British Empire. Gibson Square.
In Paris today a tragedy has befallen George Villiers, 2nd Duke of Buckingham's sister: Mary “Mall” Villiers Herbert Stuart, Dowager Duchess of Richmond's only living son, Esme Stuart, 2nd Duke of Richmond, died of smallpox, aged 10.
Esme's body was brought back to London, and buried on 4 September in Westminster Abbey.
It was probably at this point that "Mall" Stuart (1622–1685) returned to England, and joined the Court of her childhood friends, the Stuart Brothers and, of course, her brother. Good news: There was a fourth husband in her future.
Henriette-Anne, Duchesse d'Orleans (AKA Minette and Madame) corresponded with her older brother, Charles II, from 1659 until her death in 1670. Her letters have been published by Cyril Hughes Hartmann (London, 1924); and more recently by Ruth, Lady Norrington (Peter Owen, 1996). The letters document clandestine intrafamilial communications on serious political issues -- especially foreign policy -- such as the Secret Treaty of Dover, in which Minette's secret diplomacy played a role. This correspondence also documents the role of a woman known as "Ephelia" who distinguished herself as an unofficial conduit of royal intelligence during the Interregnum and Secret Treaty of Dover. Some of that's beyond the Diary, but just be aware that Mary "Mall" Villiers Stuart is someone lurking behind the Stuart activities, who wrote poetry, cross-dressed, fought duels (she was taught to fense years ago by Prince Rupert), and helped to create the mayhem this Court is famous for. After all, she had lived through the assassination of her father, being forcibly removed from her mother's care, marriage at 12, the death of 3 husbands and both children, the Civil Wars, and exile with Queen Henrietta Maria, and now she's only 38.
The house No. 19, York Street occupies the site of the residence of John Milton, which was one of the garden-houses for which the author of "Paradise Lost" appears to have had a preference. Part of the grounds have been walled up, and appropriated to the house formerly inhabited by Jeremy Bentham. The cotton willow-tree planted by the great poet was in a flourishing condition a few years back, although the trunk showed great signs of decay; it has now entirely disappeared, and in the place of the garden workshops and other buildings have sprung up. The present frontage of the house answers to No. 19 in this street, but it is evident that the original front was that facing the Park. On this side Jeremy Bentham placed a small tablet, with the following inscription: "Sacred to Milton, Prince of Poets."
In the old wall which bounded the garden on the Park side, opposite the house, were the indications of a door, long built up, which was probably used by Milton in passing between his house and Whitehall during his intercourse with Cromwell in the capacity of Latin secretary. In the house itself the arrangement of the windows has been entirely changed. It is probable that they formerly extended along the whole front, with sliding frames or lattices, divided by paneled spaces. The original paneling remains in the large room on the first floor. The upper rooms are small, and the staircase, which has not been altered, is steep and narrow. The ground-floor seems to have been comprised in one large room, as the original fireplace was evidently situated about the centre of the wall on the west side. This was probably the family room, or compromise between kitchen and parlor, so common to the economy of houses of respectable pretensions in the olden time.
Meanwhile, at Whitehall, Charles II wants to establish Law And Order:
On Monday, August 13, several Proclamations were given by Charles II against fighting of duels: and for calling in and suppressing the books of John Milton and John Goodwin: and by publishing a Proclamation from 30 May, 1660 called "A Proclamation against Vicious, Debauched, and Profane Persons". This was reported in the Parliamentary Intelligencer for August 14 - August 20, 1660; Issue 34.
Charles II must have considered dueling as much a threat to the stability of the monarchy as the writings of dissidents like Milton, all being linked to general moral degeneracy, That the Proclamations were were delivered on the same day links them.
Next Mercurius Publicus comprising the Sum of Forraign Intelligence for August 9 - August 16, 1660, issue 33, published the following Royal Proclamation: “His Majesty … having formerly in a Declaration published at Brussels, November 24, 1658, manifested his dislike of impious and unlawful Duels, strictly command all his subjects whatever, that they do not by themselves or any others, either by message, word, writing, or other ways or means, challenge, or cause to be challenged, any person or persons to in duel, nor to carry, accept, or conceal any challenge, nor actually to fight or be a second to any therein.” ... “His Majesty doth thereby declare, That every person that shall offend against the said Command, shall not only incur his Majesties highest displease but shall be incapable of holding any office in his Majesties service, and never after be permitted to come to the Court, or preferred, besides the suffering of such punishments as the Law shall inflict on such offenders.”
Sadly, Charles II could issue all the Proclamations he liked, but he could not stop dueling, any more than he could stop books being published by dissidents, or people being profane.
For more about dueling after the Restoration, see: News of the Duels – Restoration Dueling Culture and the Early Modern Press, by Alexander Hay PhD Southampton Solent University https://www.academia.edu/27304247…
"It appears that he was supposed to be in attendance on Pepys when his master awoke in the morning. He was to work all day and be there when Pepys went to bed. Only then could he crash."
The Diary shows that's not quite true, Dick.
Will Hewer could ask Pepys after dinner if he would be needed for a few hours, as he wanted to -- in this case, visit his mother or friends. Last week he was out of town apparently, on a trip which involved horseback riding. Pepys says he goes to Sandwich's to meet up with Hewer, where they had agreed to meet when they had both finished their errands. There are many times in Hewer's day when he could relax while Pepys is in meetings. Yes, Hewer was "on duty" more than servants are legally permitted to be these days, but it was a cooperative relationship, and the Pepys provided him with everything. The staff were the Pepys' family in many ways. Hewer didn't have to commute home for an hour each way every day, shop for and cook his own dinner, fix his own plumbing, pay bills, or do his own cleaning, mending and laundry.
Seething Lane was a little commune, and everyone had their role and responsibilities. It was totally different to our single, alienated, self-reliant mindset. I guarantee they laughed more than you are used to, every day. There's nothing more funny than folk. (Also, don't be confused by the Victorian attitude to servants: This wasn't a seen-but-not-heard situation. Again, everyone knew their place and their roles, and so long as no one stepped over the line, things ran every smoothly. Pepys is drawing the line tonight for a 18-year-old.)
Bishopsgate was one of the few parts of the City spared by the Great Fire. Bishopsgate Street was lined with ancient taverns, used as points of departure and arrival for those travelling up and down the old Roman road north from the City of London.
The part inside the City wall was known as Bishopsgate Within and the part outside the wall was Bishopsgate Without, and beyond, where the muddy road widened, was known as Bishopsgate Street.
The taverns served as hotels, drinking and dining houses, breweries and stables, couriers and coach offices, places of business and of entertainment, and were such significant centers of commerce that they issued their own currency for use as change.
There is a vibrant graphic quality in these miniature token designs, delighting in combining hand-lettering and familiar imagery with an appealing utilitarian irregularity.
Long before universal literacy or the numbering of London streets, buildings were adorned with symbols and easily-recognizable images like those graven upon the front of these tokens. The reverse carries the date and initials of the owner that issued the token, who may latterly be identified from the vintners’ records.
Once, tavern tokens were unremarkable items of small monetary value, passed hand to hand without a second thought, but now these rare specimens are precious evidence of another life in another time, long ago in this place.
The article now features photos of tokens from the Bishopgate Inns of The Ship, The Beehive, the Mitre, the Flower Pot, the Helmet, the Read Lion Court, the Black Raven, the Sunne, the Lion Above a Stick of Candles, At The Sign of the Bore, the Half Moon Brewhouse, Edward Nourse Next The Bull In Bishopsgate Street, plus the White Heart at Bedlam and King’s Head, Spittlegate.
The White Hart is the lone tavern that has weathered the centuries to survive into the present era.
Meanwhile in Essex, the Rev. Ralph says the harvest was good, but he's concerned that the Act of Oblivion will "be moderate".
He's in the heart of Presbyterian country, and prays that God's acts of oblivion will be "famous and large" because he knows many sinners.
OR, perhaps he worries Charles II's retribution will be too moderate to spare his parishoners -- and maybe he'll lose his parish if he's judged to be too Presbyterian; Parliament is debating how to handle a country full of dissenting ministers.
We're told Rev. Ralph was a Greek and Latin scholar at University -- but his English leaves a bit to be desired. This could read either way.
"Many people look after my house in Axe-yard to hire it, ..."
There is usually a housing crisis in London -- especially when Parliament is in session, and especially when there is a change-over in administrations. The Old Guard need to finish their business before they pack up and relocate, but the in-coming Guard are eager to get settled. Axe Yard was prime turf (location, location, location), even if the house was "rustic".
"... for him, which methinks is a very great change."
Sir John Claypole MP is looking for a town abode close to Whitehall -- he's still got his country mansion, but his mother-in-law has taken up residence there. He must have been planning some redemption of his name and reputation -- other Cromwells were able to do that.
John Claypole was born on 21 August 1625 at Norborough, Peterborough, Northamptonshire, the son of John Cleypole and Mary Angell.
John Claypole married, firstly, Elizabeth Cromwell, daughter of Oliver Cromwell and Elizabeth Bouchier, on 13 February 1646 at Trinity Church, Ely, Cambridgeshire.
When Elizabeth "Bettie" Cromwell was 16 years old, she fell in love with the mild-mannered 22-year-old Parliamentarian soldier (who was also her father's Master of the Horse) John Claypole, and she was lucky to be able to marry for love. She and John were happy and showered with gifts from her father (e.g. Cromwell made Claypole a peer, thus making his daughter Lady Claypole). The couple had several children, including Cromwell Claypole, who died c May 1678
John Claypole was admitted to Gray's Inn on 30 June, 1651.
John Claypole held the office of M.P. for Carmarthenshire from 1654 to 1655, and held the office of a Lord of the Bedchamber to the Protector.
John Claypole MP was invested as a Knight on 16 July, 1657, and created 1st Baronet Claypole on 20 July 1657.
In 1655 the 26-year-old Lady Elizabeth "Bettie" Cromwell Claypole began to have noticeable health problems. Lady Antonia Fraser states, 'Bettie Claypole was seriously ill (probably with the first manifestation of the cruel cancer that was ultimately to kill her)'.
In August 1658, after a horrendously painful time, Lady Bettie died. She was only 29. Her father was inconsolable.
After leaving London in April 1660, "Protectress Joan" Elizabeth Bourchier Cromell was allowed to live quietly with her daughter's widower, John Claypole, at Northborough Manor, Northamptonshire.
But Sir John Claypole MP’s title was disallowed after the Restoration. On 5 June, 1660 Sir John Claypole MP signed a declaration of allegiance to Charles II.
There is a memorial tablet at St. Andrew’s Parish Church, Northborough that shows Elizabeth Bourchier Cromell died, and was buried in Northborough Church on November 19, 1665. However, there is an indication this date was a blind to protect Elizabeth, and an alternative date in October 1672 is suggested. As with so many other details of her life, the correct date of her death may never be known.
Sir John Claypole MP married, secondly, Blanche Teeke on 21 March, 1670. They had a daughter, Bridget Claypole, who died c 1674.
Sir John Claypoole MP died on 26 June 1688 at age 62 at Norborough Manor, Peterborough, Northamptonshire.
Hi Ruslan -- My guess is that more baptismal and death records have become available in the last 150 years, so additional children have been identified, and Mr. Wheatley has been over-ruled.
Comments
Third Reading
About Monday 13 August 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
Agreed on your logic, MartinVT. This discussion with Sandwich would not be undertaken hurriedly, or the results go unrecorded.
But the "Sam now also has 100L in his purse" is more likely to be his take from the Privy Seal Office than from the Navy Board.
(Parliament has approved money for the army and navy back pay, but someone has now to go out and borrow the cash from the City merchants, and then run it through the Exchequer to be parcelled out appropriately.)
I think Pepys had left his 100/. with Daniel Rawlinson, owner of the Mitre in Fenchurch Street, for safekeeping recently, rather than have roughly 1,000/. in today's money, on his person as he gallavanted around London at night with Will Hewer and a link boy.
Tonight, probably for safety, he takes a coach home.
And tonight he is home early enough to hold prayers for his household.
He doesn't mention doing this very often, so I wonder if it was too mundane to record, or if he was an irresponsible employer: he has 3 teenager servants in his care; he should set a good example.
About Scrofula (The King's Evil)
San Diego Sarah • Link
PART 2
"Clerical hierarchy were forced to confront a miracle worker of the Protestant faith. ... Although a minor event in an era of turmoil, Greatrakes forced society to confront the relationship between religion, science, and politics. The fractures between these beliefs, and conclusions drawn from them, influenced thinking towards the most famous miracle healer of the age, Charles II."
"Charles began his healing career almost from the time of his father’s execution, touching 11 people in Jersey in Dec,, 1649, aged 19, without throne or kingdom.
"From this humble beginning, Charles II became the most prolific healer of the age, possibly of all England rulers before or since. By his death in 1685, Charles had touched over 100,000 people; 2 percent of the English population."
"Charles was always careful to cultivate his image as a healing monarch, and encouraged public viewings of the rite. He invited dignitaries to the ceremony, such as ... Cosimo III of Tuscany, and the Ambassador of Morocco, who remarked after the ceremony that he now found Charles 'to be the greatest monarch in Europe.'"
"... a member of the royal household, Nathaniel Crewe, Lord Bishop of Durham, and as Clerk of the Closet to Charles II, acted as the king’s personal chaplain and head of the private gallery at the Chapel Royal. He was responsible for the healing ceremony, where he presided at the king’s right hand, holding the gold angels the king would present to the sick."
Pepys knew Crewe: https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
"... the kings defenders sought to have things both ways: they denied current Catholic miracles, while promoting their own wonder-working king."
Chancellor "Edward Hyde ... proclaimed in his book *Animadversions* that Charles II had healed more than any other figure in history -- while attacking the 'Fanaticism fanatically imputed to the Catholick Church.'
"Simultaneously denying contemporary miracles and defending the cures of the king was an intellectual challenge; by saying the royal touch was not quite a miracle, they walked a fine line between their theology and their royalism."
"An undercurrent of belief, ... was that the gift of healing was given to those who were personally holy. Charles II was notorious for his decadence, and many decried his personal life. His moral laxity must have made it difficult for the deeply religious to accept his healing gift."
"Charles II strived to strengthen his rule ... consequently sought to portray himself as a divinely sanctioned ruler who both answered only to God, and followed common law and was dedicated to protecting the rights of the English people and the existing establishment.
"The royal rite of healing was the perfect expression of those 2 images of the monarchy. The gift of healing was God given, making the king a quasi-divine person. But Charles used the gift to heal and protect his subjects ... not to rule arbitrarily."
About Scrofula (The King's Evil)
San Diego Sarah • Link
Background to Charles II Touching for scrofula:
Kings, Bastards, and Enthusiasts Touching for the Evil in Restoration England -- By Christopher Andrews
An honors thesis submitted to the History Department of Rutgers University
Written under the supervision of Prof, Alastair Bellany, April 2012
https://history.rutgers.edu/docma…
His research says in part -- and I have omitted a lot:
"Charles II alone touched nearly 7,000 of his subjects in 1660, and by the end of his 24 year reign, he had stroked around 100,000 people.
However, despite this popularity, within 30 years of Charles’ death the royal rite of healing was abandoned by the English monarchy."
"Immediately upon his return in 1660, he enthusiastically, even frantically, resumed the full rite, and he touched almost every month for the remainder of his reign."
"Valentine Greatrakes, the ‘Irish Stroker’, was a veritable 17th century celebrity, a faith healer whose apparently miraculous cures rivaled those of the king. By all accounts, Greatrakes healed thousands of sick petitioners, and was wondrously successful in his cures.
"'The great discourse now at the CoffeeHouses, and every where' in 1666 was Valentine Greatrakes, and all manner of men and women traveled across the British Isles for a chance to receive his touch.
"Even Charles II, clearly fascinated by this rival stroker, could not resist the spectacle and had Greatrakes summoned to Whitehall to perform his cures before the entire royal court."
"... reports that Greatrakes was in England had reached the royal court, and he was shortly summoned by Lord Arlington to report to Whitehall and present himself before Charles II. No account survives that describes the meeting between the two greatest healers of the day. Whatever transpired, Charles was content to leave Greatrakes unmolested, a notable contrast with his father who imprisoned numerous pretenders to his touch.
"While in London, Greatrakes cultivated friendships with prominent people, such as the Virtuosi Robert Boyle, Ralph Cudworth, Benjamin Whichcott, the magistrate Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey, and the poet Andrew Marvell, all of who bore witness to his extraordinary healing abilities. ...
By the summer of 1666, Greatrakes had tired of the excitement of London, and returned to his estates in Affane [IRELAND].
"By all accounts he continued to heal throughout his life, and kept in contact with members of the elite he had met in England, exchanging correspondences with Edmund Berry Godfrey, and sending details of the continuing cures he wrought in a letter to Robert Boyle in 1668."
It is important for us to know about Greatrakes because it was possible for his "miracles" to be examined, while any questioning of The King's powers to heal were off limits, since Anglicans still believed he was a representative of God on earth.
About Bill of Comprehension
San Diego Sarah • Link
I was reading about Valentine Greatrakes who, around 1660, had a revelation that he could heal scrofula, and earned a visit to Whitehall to meet with Charles II to discuss/demonstrate his abilities.
It turns out that, after the Diary, he got caught up with the Muggletonians:
"Valentine Greatrakes returned to London a number of times, in 1675 serving as an intermediary between the Irish Muggletonians and their English founder, Lodowick Muggleton.
Greatrakes connection with the Muggletonians is noteworthy, but it is tempting to read too much into the association. The Muggletonians were a radical and small religious group that arose in the mid 1600’s when 2 London tailors experienced a divine revelation that they were the prophets foretold of in the Book of Revelation.
The Muggletonians were a millenarian sect, one of many that arose in the tumult of the 17th century. However, they were a largely apolitical group, and Greatrakes interest in them probably speaks more to his own mystical and prophetic religious experiences than his political motivations.
While his continued interest in the religious and political life of the country is evident, most of his days were taken up by the mundane routine of running a small estate in Ireland, and his notoriety ever reached the heights it had in 1666, when his fame as the Irish Stroker had made him known throughout the British Isles.
His exploits were remembered, and he continued to feature as an object of puzzlement and cause of debate in discourses on religion, miracles, and science, even into the 18th century."
https://history.rutgers.edu/docma…
So after a visit to Charles II, Greatrakes eventually retired to Ireland and did his best to be a country gentleman. Being a retired miraculous healer is difficult -- people always want you to come out of retirement.
About Saturday 27 April 1667
San Diego Sarah • Link
The publishing contract for Paradise Lost, dated today, can be seen at
https://www.bl.uk/collection-item…
The historical context, and Milton's 25-year journey writing this epic -- inspired by King Arthur's myth -- can be learned through
https://www.college.columbia.edu/…
About Windsor
San Diego Sarah • Link
Windsor Castle was a prison during the Interregnum, especially for Royalists captured after Charles II's defeat at the second Battle of Worcester. Presumably the townspeople had to host their guards and their families.
When the prison closed and Commonwealth authorities went home, the town seems to have became a bit lawless:
https://www.british-history.ac.uk…
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
About Monday 13 August 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
In May we noted how the Commonwealth prisoners held at Windsor Castle were set free, and some -- like Lauderdale -- headed to The Hague to renew their friendships with Charles II. All authority must have left Windsor along with the prison.
On August 7 we read of a petition from the Mayor and Aldermen of Windsor to the Commons asking to be allowed to evict the poor women and children who had moved into the Castle.
Now there is a new outrage coming from Windsor:
Henry Jermyn (1605 - 1684) -- the fourth but second surviving son of Sir Thomas Jermyn (1572–1645) of Rushbrooke, Suffolk, Vice-Chamberlain to King Charles, and his wife Catherine, daughter of Sir William Killigrew of Hanworth, Middlesex (a sister of Sir Robert Killigrew).
When Charles II went to Breda in April, 1660, Henry, Lord Jermyn remained in Paris with Queen Henrietta Maria. She later persuaded Charles II to create him Earl of St. Albans in 1660.
But gossip (which the historian Hallam accepted as authentic, but is not supported by real evidence) asserted that Jermyn was secretly married to the widow of King Charles. It was further rumored ** at the time ** that he may have been the true father of at least one of her children -- possibly even Charles II.
For example, in the Domestic State Papers for 13 August, 1660, is a report by Capt. Francis Robinson about Nathaniel Angelo (a Windsor clergyman), asserting that 'all the royal children were Jermyn's bastards'.
No wonder Charles II is issuing Declarations and Proclamations dictating that people must behave better. That this report made it into the DSPs means everyone at Court heard this slight on Queen Henrietta Maria's reputation, and of his family. Very galling.
REFERENCE: Adolph, Anthony (2012). The King's Henchman. Henry Jermyn: Stuart Spymaster and Architect of the British Empire. Gibson Square.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hen…
About Friday 10 August 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
In Paris today a tragedy has befallen George Villiers, 2nd Duke of Buckingham's sister:
Mary “Mall” Villiers Herbert Stuart, Dowager Duchess of Richmond's only living son, Esme Stuart, 2nd Duke of Richmond, died of smallpox, aged 10.
Esme's body was brought back to London, and buried on 4 September in Westminster Abbey.
It was probably at this point that "Mall" Stuart (1622–1685) returned to England, and joined the Court of her childhood friends, the Stuart Brothers and, of course, her brother.
Good news: There was a fourth husband in her future.
Henriette-Anne, Duchesse d'Orleans (AKA Minette and Madame) corresponded with her older brother, Charles II, from 1659 until her death in 1670. Her letters have been published by Cyril Hughes Hartmann (London, 1924); and more recently by Ruth, Lady Norrington (Peter Owen, 1996).
The letters document clandestine intrafamilial communications on serious political issues -- especially foreign policy -- such as the Secret Treaty of Dover, in which Minette's secret diplomacy played a role.
This correspondence also documents the role of a woman known as "Ephelia" who distinguished herself as an unofficial conduit of royal intelligence during the Interregnum and Secret Treaty of Dover.
Some of that's beyond the Diary, but just be aware that Mary "Mall" Villiers Stuart is someone lurking behind the Stuart activities, who wrote poetry, cross-dressed, fought duels (she was taught to fense years ago by Prince Rupert), and helped to create the mayhem this Court is famous for.
After all, she had lived through the assassination of her father, being forcibly removed from her mother's care, marriage at 12, the death of 3 husbands and both children, the Civil Wars, and exile with Queen Henrietta Maria, and now she's only 38.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esm…
http://englishhistoryauthors.blog…
http://www.ephelia.com/textual_li…
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
About Tuesday 12 August 1662
San Diego Sarah • Link
Evidently AI is not a Royalist -- but other than that, I think it did a good job.
About Monday 7 May 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
More about John Milton's house in Petty France.
Taken from:
Old and New London: Volume 4.
Originally published by Cassell, Petter & Galpin, London, 1878.
Westminster: Tothill Fields and neighbourhood
Pages 14-26
https://www.british-history.ac.uk…
The house No. 19, York Street occupies the site of the residence of John Milton, which was one of the garden-houses for which the author of "Paradise Lost" appears to have had a preference.
Part of the grounds have been walled up, and appropriated to the house formerly inhabited by Jeremy Bentham.
The cotton willow-tree planted by the great poet was in a flourishing condition a few years back, although the trunk showed great signs of decay; it has now entirely disappeared, and in the place of the garden workshops and other buildings have sprung up.
The present frontage of the house answers to No. 19 in this street, but it is evident that the original front was that facing the Park. On this side Jeremy Bentham placed a small tablet, with the following inscription: "Sacred to Milton, Prince of Poets."
In the old wall which bounded the garden on the Park side, opposite the house, were the indications of a door, long built up, which was probably used by Milton in passing between his house and Whitehall during his intercourse with Cromwell in the capacity of Latin secretary.
In the house itself the arrangement of the windows has been entirely changed. It is probable that they formerly extended along the whole front, with sliding frames or lattices, divided by paneled spaces.
The original paneling remains in the large room on the first floor.
The upper rooms are small, and the staircase, which has not been altered, is steep and narrow.
The ground-floor seems to have been comprised in one large room, as the original fireplace was evidently situated about the centre of the wall on the west side. This was probably the family room, or compromise between kitchen and parlor, so common to the economy of houses of respectable pretensions in the olden time.
About Tuesday 14 August 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
Meanwhile, at Whitehall, Charles II wants to establish Law And Order:
On Monday, August 13, several Proclamations were given by Charles II against fighting of duels: and for calling in and suppressing the books of John Milton and John Goodwin: and by publishing a Proclamation from 30 May, 1660 called "A Proclamation against Vicious, Debauched, and Profane Persons".
This was reported in the Parliamentary Intelligencer for August 14 - August 20, 1660; Issue 34.
Charles II must have considered dueling as much a threat to the stability of the monarchy as the writings of dissidents like Milton, all being linked to general moral degeneracy, That the Proclamations were were delivered on the same day links them.
Next Mercurius Publicus comprising the Sum of Forraign Intelligence for August 9 - August 16, 1660, issue 33, published the following Royal Proclamation:
“His Majesty … having formerly in a Declaration published at Brussels, November 24, 1658, manifested his dislike of impious and unlawful Duels, strictly command all his subjects whatever, that they do not by themselves or any others, either by message, word, writing, or other ways or means, challenge, or cause to be challenged, any person or persons to in duel, nor to carry, accept, or conceal any challenge, nor actually to fight or be a second to any therein.” ... “His Majesty doth thereby declare, That every person that shall offend against the said Command, shall not only incur his Majesties highest displease but shall be incapable of holding any office in his Majesties service, and never after be permitted to come to the Court, or preferred, besides the suffering of such punishments as the Law shall inflict on such offenders.”
Sadly, Charles II could issue all the Proclamations he liked, but he could not stop dueling, any more than he could stop books being published by dissidents, or people being profane.
For more about dueling after the Restoration, see:
News of the Duels – Restoration Dueling Culture and the Early Modern Press, by Alexander Hay PhD
Southampton Solent University
https://www.academia.edu/27304247…
About Saturday 11 August 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
Pepys' distant relative, Sir Gilbert Pickering, sleeps better tonight -- his name was removed from the Bill of Pardon, Indemnity and Oblivion, thanks to Sandwich's influence:
https://www.british-history.ac.uk…
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
About Saturday 11 August 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
"It appears that he was supposed to be in attendance on Pepys when his master awoke in the morning. He was to work all day and be there when Pepys went to bed. Only then could he crash."
The Diary shows that's not quite true, Dick.
Will Hewer could ask Pepys after dinner if he would be needed for a few hours, as he wanted to -- in this case, visit his mother or friends.
Last week he was out of town apparently, on a trip which involved horseback riding.
Pepys says he goes to Sandwich's to meet up with Hewer, where they had agreed to meet when they had both finished their errands.
There are many times in Hewer's day when he could relax while Pepys is in meetings.
Yes, Hewer was "on duty" more than servants are legally permitted to be these days, but it was a cooperative relationship, and the Pepys provided him with everything. The staff were the Pepys' family in many ways.
Hewer didn't have to commute home for an hour each way every day, shop for and cook his own dinner, fix his own plumbing, pay bills, or do his own cleaning, mending and laundry.
Seething Lane was a little commune, and everyone had their role and responsibilities. It was totally different to our single, alienated, self-reliant mindset.
I guarantee they laughed more than you are used to, every day. There's nothing more funny than folk.
(Also, don't be confused by the Victorian attitude to servants: This wasn't a seen-but-not-heard situation. Again, everyone knew their place and their roles, and so long as no one stepped over the line, things ran every smoothly. Pepys is drawing the line tonight for a 18-year-old.)
About Bishopsgate Street
San Diego Sarah • Link
Bishopsgate was one of the few parts of the City spared by the Great Fire.
Bishopsgate Street was lined with ancient taverns, used as points of departure and arrival for those travelling up and down the old Roman road north from the City of London.
The part inside the City wall was known as Bishopsgate Within and the part outside the wall was Bishopsgate Without, and beyond, where the muddy road widened, was known as Bishopsgate Street.
The taverns served as hotels, drinking and dining houses, breweries and stables, couriers and coach offices, places of business and of entertainment, and were such significant centers of commerce that they issued their own currency for use as change.
There is a vibrant graphic quality in these miniature token designs, delighting in combining hand-lettering and familiar imagery with an appealing utilitarian irregularity.
Long before universal literacy or the numbering of London streets, buildings were adorned with symbols and easily-recognizable images like those graven upon the front of these tokens. The reverse carries the date and initials of the owner that issued the token, who may latterly be identified from the vintners’ records.
Once, tavern tokens were unremarkable items of small monetary value, passed hand to hand without a second thought, but now these rare specimens are precious evidence of another life in another time, long ago in this place.
The article now features photos of tokens from the Bishopgate Inns of The Ship, The Beehive, the Mitre, the Flower Pot, the Helmet, the Read Lion Court, the Black Raven, the Sunne, the Lion Above a Stick of Candles, At The Sign of the Bore, the Half Moon Brewhouse, Edward Nourse Next The Bull In Bishopsgate Street, plus the White Heart at Bedlam and King’s Head, Spittlegate.
The White Hart is the lone tavern that has weathered the centuries to survive into the present era.
https://spitalfieldslife.com/2023…
About Handsel
San Diego Sarah • Link
HANDSEL
VERB 1. Give a hansel to.
2. Inaugurate (something), especially by being the first to try it.
NOUN 1. A gift given for good luck at the beginning of the year or to mark an acquisition or the start of an enterprise.
2. The first installment of a payment.
This word "hansel" (sometimes spelled "handsel") comes from the Old Norse word "handsal," which means "giving of the hand to seal a promise."
Old Norse, 14th century
according to https://worddaily.com/words/hanse…
About Friday 10 August 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
Meanwhile in Essex, the Rev. Ralph says the harvest was good, but he's concerned that the Act of Oblivion will "be moderate".
He's in the heart of Presbyterian country, and prays that God's acts of oblivion will be "famous and large" because he knows many sinners.
OR, perhaps he worries Charles II's retribution will be too moderate to spare his parishoners -- and maybe he'll lose his parish if he's judged to be too Presbyterian; Parliament is debating how to handle a country full of dissenting ministers.
We're told Rev. Ralph was a Greek and Latin scholar at University -- but his English leaves a bit to be desired. This could read either way.
About Friday 10 August 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
"Many people look after my house in Axe-yard to hire it, ..."
There is usually a housing crisis in London -- especially when Parliament is in session, and especially when there is a change-over in administrations. The Old Guard need to finish their business before they pack up and relocate, but the in-coming Guard are eager to get settled. Axe Yard was prime turf (location, location, location), even if the house was "rustic".
About Friday 10 August 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
"... for him, which methinks is a very great change."
Sir John Claypole MP is looking for a town abode close to Whitehall -- he's still got his country mansion, but his mother-in-law has taken up residence there. He must have been planning some redemption of his name and reputation -- other Cromwells were able to do that.
About John Claypole ("Lord")
San Diego Sarah • Link
John Claypole was born on 21 August 1625 at Norborough, Peterborough, Northamptonshire, the son of John Cleypole and Mary Angell.
John Claypole married, firstly, Elizabeth Cromwell, daughter of Oliver Cromwell and Elizabeth Bouchier, on 13 February 1646 at Trinity Church, Ely, Cambridgeshire.
When Elizabeth "Bettie" Cromwell was 16 years old, she fell in love with the mild-mannered 22-year-old Parliamentarian soldier (who was also her father's Master of the Horse) John Claypole, and she was lucky to be able to marry for love. She and John were happy and showered with gifts from her father (e.g. Cromwell made Claypole a peer, thus making his daughter Lady Claypole). The couple had several children, including Cromwell Claypole, who died c May 1678
John Claypole was admitted to Gray's Inn on 30 June, 1651.
John Claypole held the office of M.P. for Carmarthenshire from 1654 to 1655, and held the office of a Lord of the Bedchamber to the Protector.
John Claypole MP was invested as a Knight on 16 July, 1657, and created 1st Baronet Claypole on 20 July 1657.
In 1655 the 26-year-old Lady Elizabeth "Bettie" Cromwell Claypole began to have noticeable health problems. Lady Antonia Fraser states, 'Bettie Claypole was seriously ill (probably with the first manifestation of the cruel cancer that was ultimately to kill her)'.
In August 1658, after a horrendously painful time, Lady Bettie died. She was only 29. Her father was inconsolable.
After leaving London in April 1660, "Protectress Joan" Elizabeth Bourchier Cromell was allowed to live quietly with her daughter's widower, John Claypole, at Northborough Manor, Northamptonshire.
But Sir John Claypole MP’s title was disallowed after the Restoration.
On 5 June, 1660 Sir John Claypole MP signed a declaration of allegiance to Charles II.
There is a memorial tablet at St. Andrew’s Parish Church, Northborough that shows Elizabeth Bourchier Cromell died, and was buried in Northborough Church on November 19, 1665. However, there is an indication this date was a blind to protect Elizabeth, and an alternative date in October 1672 is suggested. As with so many other details of her life, the correct date of her death may never be known.
Sir John Claypole MP married, secondly, Blanche Teeke on 21 March, 1670. They had a daughter, Bridget Claypole, who died c 1674.
Sir John Claypoole MP died on 26 June 1688 at age 62 at Norborough Manor, Peterborough, Northamptonshire.
http://www.thepeerage.com/p13114.…
and other places.
About Jane Turner (b. Pepys, Pepys' cousin)
San Diego Sarah • Link
Hi Ruslan -- My guess is that more baptismal and death records have become available in the last 150 years, so additional children have been identified, and Mr. Wheatley has been over-ruled.